


On Canon and Fanfic

by Marta



Category: Lord of the Rings (2001 2002 2003), Lord of the Rings - J. R. R. Tolkien, TOLKIEN J. R. R. - Works, The Silmarillion - J. R. R. Tolkien, Unfinished Tales - J. R. R. Tolkien
Genre: Essays, Gen
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2008-03-29
Updated: 2008-03-29
Packaged: 2017-10-17 02:55:44
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 2,241
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/172166
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Marta/pseuds/Marta
Summary: <blockquote class="userstuff">
              <p>What exactly qualifies as "A.U.?" Is it a negative term? Is any fanfic really canon-consistent, or is it all alternate universe? In this brief essay I attempt to define what precisely I mean when I use this term, and along the way explore the relationship between canon and fanfic in general.</p>
            </blockquote>





	On Canon and Fanfic

**Author's Note:**

> Beta: Annmarwalk. Also, thanks to everyone who commented on the first draft: Tanaqui, Roh_wyn, Just_ann_now, Rhapsody, EdorasLass, Aranel Took, Phyncke, Nath, Pandemonium_213, meckinock, makamu, and dkpalaska. *blows kisses to all*

Is "AU" a pejorative label? It's a question that seems to come up every so often. Certainly, for some people AU means badfic, and sometimes people use it more widely than I think they need to.

But before I can even begin to answer that, I need to define what AU is for me. It's one of those terms that (like "Mary Sue") seem to take on different meanings for each reader. 

Juno correctly pointed out in her post that if you want to read something truly canonical, go read the original author. We have over 1,000 pages in LOTR + appendices, never mind The Hobbit, Silm, and all the pseudocanonical stuff (eep HoME! UT! And the list goes on....) It's enough reading material to last anyone for a long, long time, and if you're like me by the time you get to the end you want to begin re-reading again.

But we all come to fanfic, and I have to imagine that for at least some poeple it's because you want more than the original text can offer. You want to know about Boromir's torrid love affairs, Feanor's and Nerdanel's courtship, Aragorn's childhood growing up in Rivendell. Maybe you even want to know about events hinted at in canon but never fleshed out, like the driving of Sauron from Dol Guldur in The Hobbit. In any of these cases you want to *add* to the original canon material. That means at least two key facts are true:

  

  * You want to write something that isn't already addressed in the canon
  

  


  

  * What you write won't itself be included in the canon.
  



  
That means (*drumroll*).... all fanfic is non-canonical! Seems like not such a big jump, maybe, but it's important to remember. If you aren't adding anything to canon, then you have to wonder why you're writing. Even if you're telling a canonical scene from a new perspective, hopefully you're bringing something new to the table. Writing fanfic takes effort, and if what you're writing is absolutely 100% canonical (as in: not adding anything to what Tolkien wrote), then why are you bothering?

However, I think we can draw an important distinction between stories that flesh out canon and stories that tell an entirely different tale from what Tolkien wrote. To take LOTR as an example, I approach stories that are gapfillers or alternate perspectives of scenes in the book, or stories set in that same time period in lands not covered by the book, in a very different way than I do stories where the characters are from canon but the events aren't even hinted at by Tolkien.

 **Newsflash** : There is nothing wrong with telling stories different from what Tolkien wrote. These stories aren't less worthy or anything, just different. You will attract your readers for different reasons.

I'd call these stories extra-canonical. They're stories outside of canon.

Then there are stories that actually  _break_  canon. They either aren't consistent with what Tolkien wrote, or you would expect something about them to be mentioned in the canon if the factoid had been true. A really good example of this type of story is a Tenth Walker story. I know a lot of people look down on Tenth Walker stories, but some have been done really well (Juno's Lothiriel jumps to mind). The thing is, these stories necessarily change canon. It's not just some event that happens before or after canon, adding to the story but consistent with it. Here there is an added element beyond what Tolkien wrote, or you take away something that Tolkien wrote. 

I'd call these stories  _un_ canonical. They break canon in some regard. This still doesn't make them  _bad_  stories, but you have to draw my attention in some important way. 

I can think of several reasons connected to the canon why people read fanfic.

  

  * they are intrigued by the events of the original canon
  

  


  

  * the characters or cultures connect with them
  

  


  

  * the themes of the authors seem relevant and worth exploring
  



Anyone might be disappointed if they're looking for the third; there's no guarantee fanfic writers will write about the same issues that were important to the original authors. Extra-canonical fanfic also departs from the first possibility. So if you're writing extracanonical fanfic, the only one of these three possible motivating factors you have left is the first one: the reader liked the original author's characters and cultures, and wanted to read more stories about them. If you also make it uncanonical (which usually means changing the cultures or characters, sometimes significantly and sometimes not so significantly), you run the risk of losing the second possible motivation as well. And if you do that, you'll need a reason to make me keep reading.

There may be lots of reasons for why people read fanfic. Perhaps your readers like the communal nature of fanfic, the possibility to discuss an author's work with them as or soon after it's being written. Or maybe they know they like you from your other more canonical stories and are won over by your general writing stories. Fanfic can function as damned good fiction, never mind the fan part. And I often read stories in fandoms where I know very little about the source material, usually because someone whose Tolkien fanfic I've read has moved on to that fandom. (For instance, I've read stories about  _Good Omens_  and _Stargate: Atlantis_ , despite never having read the book or seen the show.) It can be done. I read good fiction by people I know will present good fiction, even if I don't know the canon.

My point is, I read stuff by authors I know, for reasons other than that I like the fandom they're writing in. If I read such stories it's for some reason other than that I liked the canon of the story. 

But here's the catch: if you're going to write fanfic, and it's not going to be about the characters and cultures and events that drew me to the fandom, then I'm going to feel a tad let down anyway from the beginning. I expect those things when I come to fanfic. I'll read stuff that has not been through the vetting that is the publishing process (and yes, I know a lot of substandard stuff can still get published but there's  _some_  QC...), will put up with the frustration of reading off my computer rather than curled up in the sofa - because I want more than just good writing, I want those same characters. If you want to keep me reading, then it won't be because it's fanfic; and if you didn't warn me that the story is uncanonical so I was prepared going in, then you'll have to overcome my initial surprise

Now this doesn't mean you can't do a creative re-interpretation of the character or culture. My OTP is Boromir/Theodred, for Pete's sake. I like subtext and rage against the man, and all that jazz. But there's a world of difference between stretching the canon and completely disregarding it. You can give Boromir a secret passion for Haradric poetry, and Denethor could have been a renowned opera singer in his youth - and if you sell me on the idea, more power to you. You can even make Boromir a homosexual. You can make  _Faramir_ like men, too, if you can reconcile that with his attraction to Eowyn. This is all certainly extracanonical because these are all things Tolkien didn't write into his work. But is it _un_ canonical? 

Not if you aren't contradicting what Tolkien actually wrote. And here's where two main key points come in.

  

  * It's not uncanonical because it contradicts your personal interpretation of a character. Even if you really, really believe that's how Tolkien meant that character - if it doesn't contradict something Tolkien wrote, it's still canonical.
  

  


  

  * It's not uncanonical if it breaks a fanon. "Study, to show thyself approved," to borrow a phrase. It's unreasonable to expect every author to work in those little fannish inventions that you think are so believable you can hardly imagine the books' events without them. If you're going to tell someone they're wrong or be disappointed, make sure you actually understand the canon yourself.
  



Canon is what Tolkien wrote. Not what you personally think, not what you  _think_  he wrote -- what actually came out of his typewriter.

Also, even if a story is uncanonical, this doesn't mean it's a sin against Tolkien. The man is dead, he doesn't feel any more pain. And even if he would blush, fanfic is the production of the fanfic author's mind and imagination, not that of the original canon's author. It doesn't make it a bad story in other respects just because it doesn't completely follow canon. It can still have good characterizations and good plot; those things just don't happen to coincide with what Tolkien wrote. 

So having said all of that, I think I'm ( _finally!_ ) able to talk about that AU question. I don't write a lot of AUs myself, but I was the one that wrote up most of the FAQs for the [Middle-earth Fanfiction Awards](http://www.mefawards.net/MEFA2007), and as part of that I had to write up a description of our category for Alternate Universe stories. As part of that description I wrote:

> For the purpose of the Middle-earth Fanfiction Awards, an alternative universe piece is one that deviates from its source material (whether the story or movies) in some important respect. Pieces describing something that might have occurred but are not specifically said to occur are not necessarily AUs.  
> 

  
That's actually a pretty good description of what I think AUs are. They are stories that deviate from the express canon of that fandom. So using my division above they are not _extra_ canonical; they are  _un_ canonical.

But there's more. Not all uncanonical stories are AUs. AUs are a specific subgenre of writing. They change some detail of the universe, usually a fairly constrained change that has a lot of ripples that affect a lot of other issues. A good example is Dwim's novel [Lie Down in the Darkness, Rise Up From the Ash](http://www.henneth-annun.net/stories/chapter.cfm?stid=8). In this story, Gollum dies escaping from Mirkwood, and the Quest has to change to accommodate this fact. An AU concept that occurred to me fairly recently is how the Quest might have unfolded differently if there had been a king in the North. 

I've also seen AUs where Faramir goes on the quest instead of (or with) Boromir; Galadriel takes the Ring; Boromir lives past Henneth Annun; and any other number of topics. The basic point is that there is one specific fact changed. The characters still are basically consistent with what Tolkien wrote, and if anything else changes, it is because the purposeful change that was made forces that subsequent change.

Really, a good AU is like a surgical incision. A story where the author breaks with canon out of carelessness or lack of knowledge is more like a machete cut. The affect of an AU's change is steady, exact; it is predictable and used to good affect. In the latter case (the machete), it can get messy, and the change is usually not under the author's control. As a result the reader usually feels like they have lost a canonical story and often not gained a lot in return, as far as canonicity is concerned. (A good AU can tell you as much about the themes and other elements of the canon as a canon-compliant one does.)

So AU in itself is not pejorative, or at least it doesn't have to be. It is sometimes misused by authors who are trying to excuse not doing their research properly. (In a good AU, an author often knows the canon very well and is purposefully choosing to change it. That makes a difference.) The term is also misused by readers to label something they don't like, don't think Tolkien (or whomever) would have intended, etc. But Tolkien is long dead and all we can  _really_  know is what he's told us. This is just what I said it was - a  _mis_ -use of the term "AU."

Even "uncanonical" does not have to be a pejorative term. If an author does not care so much about canon and wants to focus on other parts of the writing, this is okay. I think there will always be readers for a well-told story, and there are people who care more about how well a story excels in other aspects than its canon-compliance. This is just one thing people look for in a story, and there are many others - beautiful language, good pacing, exciting plot, thought-provoking themes, believable characterization, and so on. For some people canon is important, and if you choose not to focus on this aspect, you will lose some readers. But this is true for any aspect of the writing process. So while some people may criticize you for being uncanonical, you could probably just as easily criticize them for not doing as well as you'd like in some other important aspect of their writing.

A long answer to a short question, I know! But it's allowed me to explore some interesting topics and share my opinion on canon and how it intersects with fandom, a topic very near and dear to my heart. I hope you've been enriched for having read this far, even if we don't agree on every point.


End file.
